Jordan v. Ballard, 2:13-cv-06864

Petitioner Daniel Lee Jordan was convicted in Kanawha County Circuit Court on July 13, 2010 of First Degree Sexual Abuse and Sexual Abuse by a Person of Trust; sentenced August 13, 2010 to 15–45 years.
The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment on June 24, 2011 (State v. Jordan, No. 101633).
Jordan filed a state habeas petition in Kanawha County Circuit Court on March 6, 2012, denied March 5, 2013, with no copy of the petition attached to his federal petition.
Jordan then filed the instant federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on April 2, 2013, raising a Confrontation Clause claim based on a pre-recorded interview.
Respondent moved to stay proceedings pending exhaustion of Jordan’s state court remedies, noting an ongoing state court appeal challenging the denial of the state habeas petition.
Magistrate Judge recommended staying proceedings and holding the petition in abeyance to allow exhaustion, and transferring the case to the inactive docket.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the petition should be stayed to allow state-court exhaustion	Jordan exhausted his Confrontation Clause claim on direct appeal	State remedies for other claims were unexhausted and ripe for exhaustion	Stay granted pending exhaustion
Whether Rhines stay-and-abeyance applies to this petition	Good faith post-conviction effort supports stay	No automatic stay; exhaustion uncertain	Stay justified under Rhines for good cause and potential exhaustion

Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (U.S. 2005) (stay and abeyance available for unexhausted claims under narrow circumstances)
Breard v. Pruett, 134 F.3d 615 (4th Cir. 1998) (exhaustion burden on petitioner)
Matthews v. Evatt, 105 F.3d 907 (4th Cir. 1997) (exhaustion requirement in state-court remedies)
McDaniel v. Holland, 631 F. Supp. 1544 (S.D. W. Va. 1986) (exhaustion and procedural rules for federal review)
Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (U.S. 1973) (habeas corpus exhaustion and remedies principles)